Bartnicki v. Vopper’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
128 federal appellate · 46 district · 90 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 503 later decisions (23 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2024 · most notably Ashcroft Attorney General v. Free Speech Coalition (2002), McConnell United States Senator et al. v. Federal Election Commission et al. (2003)
128 federal appellate · 46 district · 90 state decisions — followed in 22 states
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Appellate journey
reviewedIn re Grand Jury (from Third Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 2510 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2511 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2520 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 28 U.S.C. § 2403
Relies on Katz v. United States · New York Times Co. v. Sullivan · Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. · United States v. O'Brien · National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. Y Button
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 503 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a]s a general matter, `state action to punish the publication of truthful information seldom can satisfy constitutional standards.'”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[PJrivacy concerns give way when balanced against the interest in publishing matters of public importance.”). 14 . Citing Landmark, 435 U.S. at 841-42 , 98 S.Ct. 1535 (”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“[respondents'] access to the information on the tapes was obtained lawfully, even though the information itself was intercepted unlawfully by someone else.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.